[HEADSUP] Staging, packaging and more

Baptiste Daroussin bapt at FreeBSD.org
Fri Oct 4 07:05:09 UTC 2013

On Fri, Oct 04, 2013 at 08:00:43AM +0100, Matthew Seaman wrote:
> On 04/10/2013 07:32, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> > On the other ends, that makes the package fat for embedded systems, that also
> > makes some arbitrary runtime conflicts between packages (because they both
> > provide the same symlink on the .so, while we could live with 2 version at
> > runtime), that leads to tons of potential issue while building locally, and
> > that makes having sometime insane issues with dependency tracking. Why having
> > .a, .la, .h etc in production servers? It could greatly reduce PBI size, etc.
> > 
> > Personnaly I do have no strong opinion in one or another direction. Should we be
> > nicer with developers? with end users? with embedded world? That is the question
> > to face to decide if -devel packages is where we want to go or not.
> Can't we have the best of both worlds?
> We're already planning on creating sub-packages for eg. docs and
> examples.  The default will be to install docs etc. sub-packages
> automatically unless the user opts out in some way.  I imagine there
> will be a global switch somewhere -- in pkg.conf or similar[*].
> Couldn't we work devel packages in the same way? Install by default
> alongside the main package unless explicitly requested not to.
> I think having the capability to selectively install parts of packages
> like this is important and useful functionality and something that will
> be indispensible for eg. embedded platforms.  But not an option that the
> vast majority of ordinary users will need to exercise.
> 	Cheers,
> 	Matthew
> [*] The precise mechanism for choosing which sub-package bits to install
> has not yet been written.  If anyone has any bright ideas about how this
> should all work, then I'd be interested to hear them.

That is another possiblity, I do prefer Erwin's idea about the -full, but this
also makes a lot of sense.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 196 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/attachments/20131004/f94a861f/attachment.sig>

More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list